Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

Erik Bloodaxe, Ivar the Boneless and the Great Cnut more influential than previously thought?

Posted on: December 4, 2012 - 10:10pm

x

Posts: 591

Joined: 2010-06-15

Offline

Erik Bloodaxe, Ivar the Boneless and the Great Cnut more influential than previously thought?

It has long been known that the Vikings influenced the English language after they first arrived in Lindisfarne in 793 and until the Normans took control in 1066, but the consensus was that the main influence on the language was Anglo-Saxon, also called Old English, which was introduced in the Fifth Century. After the Normans invaded, integration of the peoples occurred and Middle English, the precursor of Modern English evolved from Old English and Scandinavian.

Normally when a new language is integrated with an existing one, the existing grammar stays much the same and loanwords are added, but new research has shown that Middle English adopted much of the Scandinavian grammar.

Quite a while back (when I had a television) Did you catch the show on the Science Channel and maybe Discovery that then aired called Curiousity? I doubt you did. I watched the first few minutes and I found it interesting that Cambridge University's current holder of the Lucasian Professorship talked about the myth of the Vikings. We are from the darker stockier Norgic stock, picture bjork oscars swan dress photo, that is us. As I continue, he (Prof. Hawking) mention about one of the three giant Wolf gods were considered responsible [for] lunar ellicipses. I like to read mythology when I can. And was reminded of the Ancient Chinese have a similar myth. I think that was very cagy and wise in terms of a choice on his part. Our brains seem to be wired towards Anthropomorphisms, so there is something about a giant wolf biting at the moon, is universally considered a myth, no one disputes it.

The only Old English I've heard (or been exposed to) is the common example of 'the Lord's Prayer'. Strikingly, when it is spoken aloud, frankly, many of the portions of phrases sound like modern Norse. Particular portions reminded me of the following phrase Do See: Image :

As you mention, in the first five minutes, Hawking refers to Skoll eating. Further research shows that of the Norse wolf gods, there can be found Fenrir, Skoll and Hati. Skoll eats the moon and Hati eats the sun, according to a 13th century Icelandic text. Making a racket scares them off, but intervention is useless at Ragnarøkkr (Twilight of the Gods). This almost leads to Nietzsche contra Wagner.

Hawking also later refers to Aristarchus of Samos (the first known heliocentrist) and how Pope John XXI declared the concept of natural laws to be heresy. He later died when the roof of his palace fell on his head.

Despite being hypnotised into research into the latest shiny thing by your winking cat and Wodehousian Great Aunts, with all these tangents I’ve run out of time to look further into language trees and “kommer til å”.

I quickly got out of my depth in this, as there is so much to study and I know so little, but I know more than I used to and it kept me amused for a while.

The first idea to test their theory was to compare The Lord’s Prayer over time and language to see if a shift can be seen from West Germanic (WG) to North Germanic (NG).

The original article mentions how in NG languages like modern English, the object usually comes after the verb, unlike in WG. Other NG features are a preposition at the end, split infinitives and group genitives.

To keep it simple, I decided just to look at whether the object comes after the verb in various versions of the line ‘Give us this day our daily bread’. In other words, is the object ‘bread’ at the end or not? One would expect it to be in the middle in Old English and modern German and then later move to the end in Middle English and in modern NG languages like Norwegian.

First, in modern languages, it is almost as expected, with German having the form ‘Our daily bread, give us this day’. Since Dutch is WG too, one might expect the same, but not so. It takes the same form as the NG languages. This finding casts doubt on the whole idea of classifying WG/NG this way, but I collected more data anyway.

We see that ‘bread’ generally moves towards the end and ‘today’ moves towards the start, but not consistently.

Conclusion:Who knows, but at least the exercise has commenced and some data has been collected. It seems that there is a trend towards the shift in word order, but it isn’t neat and tidy.

As regards “kommer til å”, I’m in even deeper and choppier water, but Tobecume þin rice. [Come thy riche (kingdom)] sort of means ‘are going to’, or do you just mean that the sounds in general are alike?

As a side issue, I also discovered that it is believed that the prayer is derived from the Talmud, though I didn’t spend much time verifying that.

Dr. Hardwicke, of England, says: "The so-called 'Lord's Prayer' was learned by the Messiah as the 'Kadish' from the Talmud."

The Kadish, as translated by Christian scholar, Rev. John Gregorie, is as follows:"Our Parent which art in heaven, be gracious to us, O Lord, our God; hallowed be thy name, and let the remembrance of thee be glorified in heaven above and in the earth here below. Let thy kingdom reign over us now and forever. The holy men of old said, Remit and forgive unto all men whatsoever they have done against me. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil thing. For thine is the kingdom, and thou shalt reign in glory for ever and for evermore."

You are way beyond me as I wouldn't know where to start. But this was very interesting.

Big welcome back CJ, I havent been to your thread yet so let me say it here.

I am mentally tired right now, and pressed for time. Right now, I'm one of those go in the corner and play with blocks moods. So, We 'all' know what you mean, unless your a linguist it pretty daunting stuff, Cj. To make it all more accessible, is where one language is exposed to another. Or how words or their variant are introduced in a language. At that level it alot easier to handle, I think. Known to anyone who has ever had looked up a word, certainly knows this. Adoption of entire words from another language they were exposed to. Whereas, Distributions across language families is not for the mentally tired, even when confined to only a few simple lines. The monsters unleashed. Where are those blocks my mother packed?

As early english developed, For a time if was exposed to Latin, it was read in the mass. Thanks to the emissaries of his funny-hatness through the papal presence all over the countryside. Some whole words crept into English like the word: Mass, & abbot. Can you tell I am mentally tired ? Funny, It always reminds me of the phrase hocus pocus when ever I even hear the phrase 'Latin mass'. I gather the Protestants were wondering about the 'real presence' along quite similar-lines, I hear.

Hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus because of the latin mass. Hocus-pocus is nowadays applied to stage magic, carnies (carnivals), and illustionists. And beginning to refer to meaningless talk or activity or to anything, speech or action, that’s designed to stop you seeing what the politician or salesman is really up to or what’s actually happening. It sounds like a phrase ideal suited for the Wizard of Ox (books). Aand, of course, from an incantation used by conjurors to suggest that they are evoking some magical spell or mystical force that causes the seemingly impossible to happen. It appeared in the early seventeenth century and was referred to in a number of plays of the period. The first was this, in which a Dutchman, an absurd character called Vangoose, is speaking: If it goe from de Nature of de ting, it is de more Art; for deare is Art, and deare is Nature; yow sall see. Hochos-pochos, Paucos Palabros. These cateratures are standard fare, along with the broad humour. The Masque of Augeres by Ben Jonson, 1622. 1622 my how time flies. (Inside joke., Jean, you remember, used to call me witch girl). Another reference was in the title page of the fourth edition of Hocus Pocus Junior of 1654 (the fourth edition, 1654 -- I had a pic of but lost it). Then there's the famous appearance is in the title of the first book ever published in English about conjuring ( naturally) of Hocus Pocus Junior, The Anatomy of Legerdemain, of 1634. The rest a quote off a website, as follows: "In his book Magic on the Early English Stage of 2005, Philip Butterworth identifies the previously unknown author of this little book as William Vincent, a famous conjuror of his time, who was appointed as juggler to King James in 1619 and who used the stage name Hocus-Pocus. At this time there was no formal separation between jugglers, rope-dancers, conjurers and other performers, whose acts were summarised as “feats of activity”. Vincent did them all and was particularly known for his ability to swallow and regurgitate daggers"

Random as it must sound, I found puzzling. With all this talk of language. In the adoption of entire word into many other languages, I am thinking of. I was exposed to something quite bizarre. Recently, I know there is the issue of translating the term for: microwave. Now, Naturally if you know it's a "micro-wave", part of the spectrum. I dont think you would have much of a problem in translating it. But, Belief it or not, the whole word is cropping of in foreign languages (to the English speaker). Cry of lament apparently should go out when fundamental science eduction is missing the masses or something. Given the task, I would naturally go to the electromagnetic spectrum, I mean, 'hello'. If that failed I would break up the compound word into the two words that comprise it. Makes sense? No? But, It is odd to find out a microwave, to many, is a type of oven alone. Now, You could make something smart-alec about the Magnetron, but then you'd hear some words that usually no-one needs to translate. By this odd occurance, the impression is it is some sort of magic at work for a lot of folks. I wont say it. Plus, I am too even-tempered, and polite to say it (I hope) . . .

Big welcome back CJ, I havent been to your thread yet so let me say it here.

Thank you. Classes went well - grades out by Monday. Tired, but looking forward to next term.

danatemporary wrote:

(.......................) No? But, It is odd to find out a microwave, to many, is a type of oven alone. Now, You could make something smart-alec about the Magnetron, but then you'd hear some words that usually no-one needs to translate. By this odd occurance, the impression is it is some sort of magic at work for a lot of folks. I wont say it. Plus, I am too even-tempered, and polite to say it (I hope) . . .

Anyway (zzzzzzzzzzzz) oh, must dash for now. Fun, I have to run.

I have dabbled a little in word origins - I once wrote an English paper on the origins and history of the word "vampire." It is pretty directly from the Slavic so the history was more fun than the etymology.

It is interesting how the technical words become a thing to the people use them and they never knew the origins of the technology. Like microwave. How quickly has HD become its own word?

My comment was more along the lines of I have never looked into the details of the similarities and differences of the Scandinavian and Germanic languages.

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.

I have nothing to contribute to the discussion as before this thread I never even thought about the subject but just want to say that this type of thread is exactly why I think this is the most awesome corner of the internet because intelligent people have great questions and post their research here so that we can all learn a little bit and be slightly less ignorant than we were this morning which is about as much as we can ask out of life. Thanks X & Dana.

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X

Thanks Beyond and CJ, I am genuinely heartened by your comments. I too agree that one of the reasons I am so keen on this site is because people often take the 'publish and be damned' approach to their autodidactic research. I used to worry a little that posting my flawed idle research would make me seem foolish, but I got over it. More likely I thought was that nobody would be the slightest bit interested, but that isn't the case. Even if only a handful of people benefit, that's worth it. I suspect that there are others on the site who have shied away from posting their musings, so maybe they'll now be keener. It may even result in Socratic Dialogue.

Also, going through the same old arguments with believers can get tiresome. There is no generic atheist, but if there is a common feature, it seems to be curiosity. We don't have to always debate religion, the pursuit of knowledge trumps that.

Having thought about my post a bit more, I find that there are even more caveats. I'm a hopeless monoglot, but the missus, who understands German, reckons that the verb/object rule isn't hard and fast, though we were deep into a bottle of wine at the time, so I can't remember exactly. That may explain why my Dutch example doesn't fit the pattern. So, rather than expecting all West Germanic languages to have object then verb, it is probably more accurate to say that North Germanic languages generally don't have this pattern and West Germanic languages usually or often do. Maybe someone who knows what they're talking about will verify this.

One of the things that struck me was just how similar the modern Nordic languages are. If only I'd paid more attention to Latin and Italian in school, but in those days I was blinkered and only had time for the hard sciences.

Another issue is that religious works have a tendency to retain archaisms, to give the impression of poetry and venerable tradition; so what one finds in the bible at a certain date doesn't necessarily reflect the language of the time. Also, spelling wasn't standardised then, nor was there a universal English, so the examples I've given include some dialects.

Oh, and the Hawking link I posted above no longer works as the video has been removed.

I'm a bit burnt out on this subject for now, as I really am out of my depth and there are other shiny things beckoning, but I do hope to do some more research. I'll post it if I do. In fact, I'll try to post more in general, if time permits. People can just ignore it if they like.

My name is Jim not Jeffrick. Very simple in English; yet in other Indo-European languages it is more like. "Jeffrick not real is. Jim name is." the syntax is pure Russian [which I know] and other related languages. The IS and what IS becomes the subject of the sentence: nouns and pronouns become the modifier of the subject [IS or what IS].

In English [and Old Norwigan & Feroes] "I, he, she or it" are the ultimate subject of any sentence. It seems to come from a cultural attitude of a conquerer over the conquered.["I am the most important thing in your life NOW"] versus ["conquered now art thee, boss; me!"] I ask you which brackeded quote conveys the attitude more directly, in no uncertsin terms?

Ancient [old] Norwegian seems to have change their vernacular from "what IS a reality" to " I am a boss" at about the same time in history as the Viking settlements [after the raids] in Britain & the Neather reaches of mainland Europe [the Feroes lands] Today Feroes can be understood by English speakers as easily [or as hard as] Jamaican patois or Scottish brough.

That's my 2 cents worth, I'm currently in Guyana South America [you should hear the alledged English spoken around here] my extensive notes & books on the Indo-European language are back home near Toronto. So I can have more on this topic later [after the fifteenth]. If you're interested.

As early english developed, For a time if was exposed to Latin, it was read in the mass. Thanks to the emissaries of his funny-hatness through the papal presence all over the countryside. Some whole words crept into English like the word: Mass, & abbot. Can you tell I am mentally tired ? Funny, It always reminds me of the phrase hocus pocus when ever I even hear the phrase 'Latin mass'. I gather the Protestants were wondering about the 'real presence' along quite similar-lines, I hear.

Hocus pocus are nothing else but a corruption of hoc est corpus because of the latin mass. Hocus-pocus is nowadays applied to stage magic, carnies (carnivals), and illustionists. And beginning to refer to meaningless talk or activity or to anything, speech or action, that’s designed to stop you seeing what the politician or salesman is really up to or what’s actually happening. It sounds like a phrase ideal suited for the Wizard of Ox (books). Aand, of course, from an incantation used by conjurors to suggest that they are evoking some magical spell or mystical force that causes the seemingly impossible to happen. It appeared in the early seventeenth century and was referred to in a number of plays of the period. The first was this, in which a Dutchman, an absurd character called Vangoose, is speaking: If it goe from de Nature of de ting, it is de more Art; for deare is Art, and deare is Nature; yow sall see. Hochos-pochos, Paucos Palabros. These cateratures are standard fare, along with the broad humour. The Masque of Augeres by Ben Jonson, 1622. 1622 my how time flies. (Inside joke., Jean, you remember, used to call me witch girl). Another reference was in the title page of the fourth edition of Hocus Pocus Junior of 1654 (the fourth edition, 1654 -- I had a pic of but lost it). Then there's the famous appearance is in the title of the first book ever published in English about conjuring ( naturally) of Hocus Pocus Junior, The Anatomy of Legerdemain, of 1634. The rest a quote off a website, as follows: "In his book Magic on the Early English Stage of 2005, Philip Butterworth identifies the previously unknown author of this little book as William Vincent, a famous conjuror of his time, who was appointed as juggler to King James in 1619 and who used the stage name Hocus-Pocus. At this time there was no formal separation between jugglers, rope-dancers, conjurers and other performers, whose acts were summarised as “feats of activity”. Vincent did them all and was particularly known for his ability to swallow and regurgitate daggers"

Can add a little to your references:

"I will speak of one man ... that went about in King James his time ... who called himself, the Kings Majesties most excellent Hocus Pocus, and so was called, because that at the playing of every Trick, he used to say,Hocus pocus, tontus tabantus, vade celeriter jubeo, a dark composure of words, to blinde the eyes of the beholders, to make his Trick pass the more currantly without discovery."

My name is Jim not Jeffrick. Very simple in English; yet in other Indo-European languages it is more like. "Jeffrick not real is. Jim name is." the syntax is pure Russian [which I know] and other related languages. The IS and what IS becomes the subject of the sentence: nouns and pronouns become the modifier of the subject [IS or what IS].

In English [and Old Norwigan & Feroes] "I, he, she or it" are the ultimate subject of any sentence. It seems to come from a cultural attitude of a conquerer over the conquered.["I am the most important thing in your life NOW"] versus ["conquered now art thee, boss; me!"] I ask you which brackeded quote conveys the attitude more directly, in no uncertsin terms?

Ancient [old] Norwegian seems to have change their vernacular from "what IS a reality" to " I am a boss" at about the same time in history as the Viking settlements [after the raids] in Britain & the Neather reaches of mainland Europe [the Feroes lands] Today Feroes can be understood by English speakers as easily [or as hard as] Jamaican patois or Scottish brough.

That's my 2 cents worth, I'm currently in Guyana South America [you should hear the alledged English spoken around here] my extensive notes & books on the Indo-European language are back home near Toronto. So I can have more on this topic later [after the fifteenth]. If you're interested.

Even in the southern hemisphere, these festivals take up one's time, in a good way usually. This year, in thrall to the New Austerity, will probably just go with a Festivus Stick rather than the full-blown pole (Seinfeld reference).

Anyway, since time is hard to come by and not wanting to let this research idea drop, I will try to come to some agreement on the best way to approach this. We could even call it a methodology.

Since the subject is huge, it may be best to severely limit our scope. Perhaps for starters, we should only try to test your theory of 'conquered versus conqueror' in verb/object sequence. Maybe first try to categorise the languages in terms of verb/object order and then see when and where changes occur. Then perhaps see if those changes can be mapped onto history of population migration, invasions, wars etc. Your examples above are a great start.

This may be almost impossible to properly test, but everyone will learn something trying.

The always excellent, long running thread 'OT Stories...' offers a good example of how to tackle a complex subject over a long time span. It may sit dormant for a while, but eventually a little time is found and it carries on.

There will be inevitable sidetracks, and that is not a bad thing, but I feel that there is more hope if we all try to limit ourselves. I'll be quite busy for a bit with life stuff, but I will try to add something eventually. Anyone who can contribute is of course welcome.